var key = 'hello';
var value = 'world';
var object = {[key]: value};
key in object
object.key
--enable-precise-memory-info
flag.
Test case name | Result |
---|---|
key in object | |
object.key |
Test name | Executions per second |
---|---|
key in object | 814529472.0 Ops/sec |
object.key | 814109952.0 Ops/sec |
I'll explain the benchmark in detail.
Benchmark Overview
The provided JSON represents a JavaScript microbenchmark test case on MeasureThat.net. The goal of this benchmark is to compare the performance difference between two approaches when accessing a value within an object: using the dot notation (object.key
) and using the in
operator (key in object
).
Approach 1: Using Dot Notation (object.key
)
This approach involves directly accessing the value stored under a given key by concatenating the key to the object's name. For example, if you want to access the value
property of an object named myObject
, you would use myObject.value
.
Pros:
in
operatorCons:
Approach 2: Using the in
Operator (key in object
)
This approach involves using the in
operator to check if a key exists within an object. If the key is found, it returns the corresponding value; otherwise, it returns undefined
.
Pros:
Cons:
Library Usage
There is no library used in this benchmark. The script preparation code only defines a simple object myObject
with a single property value
.
Special JS Features/Syntax
The benchmark does not mention any special JavaScript features or syntax that would require additional explanation. However, it's essential to note that the in
operator and dot notation are built-in operators in JavaScript.
Other Alternatives
If you wanted to measure the performance difference between other approaches, such as using bracket notation ([key]
) or accessing properties through a different object (e.g., myObject[key]
), MeasureThat.net would allow you to create new benchmark test cases with varying script preparation codes and HTML preparation codes.
Keep in mind that the choice of approach depends on your specific use case, performance requirements, and personal coding style.